What is 0/0 and why does it cause so much confusion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Blackhawk4560
  • Start date Start date
Blackhawk4560
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Problem- 0/0 = ?

This has kept me up pacing the Floors many nights now, but what is 0/0?

It's either,
0/0 = 1, because anything over itself is 1
0/0 = no solution because you cannot divide by zero

Or,
0/0 = infinate, because say you have an empty jar of m&m's, how many other jars could you fill with the same amount?Crazy stuff :D
Blackhawk
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=530207
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blackhawk4560 said:
This has kept me up pacing the Floors many nights now, but what is 0/0?

It's either,
0/0 = 1, because anything over itself is 1
0/0 = no solution because you cannot divide by zero
This... (the one above)
It's NOT true that "anything over itself" is 1. The "anything" can't be zero.
Blackhawk4560 said:
Or,
0/0 = infinate, because say you have an empty jar of m&m's, how many other jars could you fill with the same amount?
"infinate" is not a word, but infinite is.
Blackhawk4560 said:
Crazy stuff :D
Blackhawk
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top